M-O-O-N - That spells Nameless

Yes, this one was quite a deviation from the book. Interesting to see they made the bar tender so young and with a seemingly larger role to play. It was great to Annette o'toole in this episode - there is a link to IT after all. Another good episode, I really like it so far.

Well-Known Member

This episode was wildly different, but it still worked. Very intense episode. Josh Duhamel was very menacing and believable. I don't think I've seen him play a baddy before. Loved seeing Annette O'Toole and she reminded me of Bevvie's father and creepy Mrs. Kersh from IT, too. All wrapped up in one person.

Just one more chapter...

The episodes keep getting better and better!
I'm watching with my husband who is not a reader and he kept asking me plot questions. Everytime I say 'I don't know' he asks "I thought you read the book?" And I tell him that they changed a lot. To that, he replied "And you're okay with that!?" (He's having flashbacks to trying to watch UTD with me. Not fun.)

Well-Known Member

I was so traumatized by the TV series of Under the Dome that I pledged not to watch 11/22/63. From what I have been reading here on the SKMB, it seems that even though the series has a lot of new content that differs from the book, people are generally liking the series. That's good. Not enough to get me to watch, but I'm happy it's being better received than UTD. For those who are watching and liking it, I have a questions: how is the acting? One big problem I had with UTD was that the acting was horrible. The actors read their lines as if they had learned them minutes before shooting and were using cue cards to help them remember the lines. Also, many of the scripts seemed to have been written on the fly. They had about as much cohesiveness as an episode of Scooby Doo. How are the scripts so far for 11/22/63? Is it well written?

Just one more chapter...

CYB, it seems like you and I usually (almost always) have very similar likes and dislikes. Going by that, I think you'd enjoy 11.22.63.
The series (so far) has made a lot of changes, while staying very much to the core of the story. Exciting enough that you don't have to be a CR to enjoy it, but close enough to the jist of the book that us CRs aren't disappointed.
The acting...Chis Cooper can do no wrong in my eyes, so imo he's the best cast character. James Franco is James Franco - not the best, but he seems to be trying hard to get it right (for some reason his voice/mannerisms are very Johnny Depp-like to me in this role, maybe that's just me, I'm not a huge fan of either actor).
I like the dude who played Frank Dunning too, but I forget the actors name.

Well-Known Member

I was so traumatized by the TV series of Under the Dome that I pledged not to watch 11/22/63. From what I have been reading here on the SKMB, it seems that even though the series has a lot of new content that differs from the book, people are generally liking the series. That's good. Not enough to get me to watch, but I'm happy it's being better received than UTD. For those who are watching and liking it, I have a questions: how is the acting? One big problem I had with UTD was that the acting was horrible. The actors read their lines as if they had learned them minutes before shooting and were using cue cards to help them remember the lines. Also, many of the scripts seemed to have been written on the fly. They had about as much cohesiveness as an episode of Scooby Doo. How are the scripts so far for 11/22/63? Is it well written?

I think the acting has been pretty good. James Franco has the charm of Jake. So far, the charm is best portrayed when he is looking around and getting his bearings on a situation, but it is there with his interactions with other characters, too. Am anxious to see the Jake/Sadie relationship, but I think he will get it right.

Chris Cooper is great in just about everything.

And Josh Duhamel was excellent as Frank. He was completely believable. And very scary.

The writing is good, too. There are some things that you recognize as being taken straight from the book and some things that are completely different. But so far it is cohesive and not a jumbled mess like UtD was.

Well-Known Member

I think the acting has been pretty good. James Franco has the charm of Jake. So far, the charm is best portrayed when he is looking around and getting his bearings on a situation, but it is there with his interactions with other characters, too. Am anxious to see the Jake/Sadie relationship, but I think he will get it right.

Chris Cooper is great in just about everything.

And Josh Duhamel was excellent as Frank. He was completely believable. And very scary.

The writing is good, too. There are some things that you recognize as being taken straight from the book and some things that are completely different. But so far it is cohesive and not a jumbled mess like UtD was.

Well-Known Member

CYB, it seems like you and I usually (almost always) have very similar likes and dislikes. Going by that, I think you'd enjoy 11.22.63.
The series (so far) has made a lot of changes, while staying very much to the core of the story. Exciting enough that you don't have to be a CR to enjoy it, but close enough to the jist of the book that us CRs aren't disappointed.
The acting...Chis Cooper can do no wrong in my eyes, so imo he's the best cast character. James Franco is James Franco - not the best, but he seems to be trying hard to get it right (for some reason his voice/mannerisms are very Johnny Depp-like to me in this role, maybe that's just me, I'm not a huge fan of either actor).I like the dude who played Frank Dunning too, but I forget the actors name.

Thanks. Yes, that is true!
I'm not a Franco fan either. I think the actor you are referring to in the second highlighted line above is Josh Duhamel. He was on All My Children (which I was a HUGE fan of) for a few years and that's about all I know of him.
Thanks for responding!

Just one more chapter...

Thanks. Yes, that is true!
I'm not a Franco fan either. I think the actor you are referring to in the second highlighted line above is Josh Duhamel. He was on All My Children (which I was a HUGE fan of) for a few years and that's about all I know of him.
Thanks for responding!

Cue the Twilight Zone music...I was also a HUGE All My Children fan for years (around the time Kelly Ripa played Haley). Never missed it back in the day (I'm thinking that's before Josh Duhamel came along).

Well-Known Member

I was so traumatized by the TV series of Under the Dome that I pledged not to watch 11/22/63. From what I have been reading here on the SKMB, it seems that even though the series has a lot of new content that differs from the book, people are generally liking the series. That's good. Not enough to get me to watch, but I'm happy it's being better received than UTD. For those who are watching and liking it, I have a questions: how is the acting? One big problem I had with UTD was that the acting was horrible. The actors read their lines as if they had learned them minutes before shooting and were using cue cards to help them remember the lines. Also, many of the scripts seemed to have been written on the fly. They had about as much cohesiveness as an episode of Scooby Doo. How are the scripts so far for 11/22/63? Is it well written?

Well-Known Member

Cue the Twilight Zone music...I was also a HUGE All My Children fan for years (around the time Kelly Ripa played Haley). Never missed it back in the day (I'm thinking that's before Josh Duhamel came along).

Jeez... this is getting weird!
I pretty much watched it on and off since it started. My mother was a huge soaps fan and I remember the first year it was on. I was only 9 the year it started, but I can remember watching it during the summer when I was home from school. I think it was the more "realistic" characters that got me interested. Fast forward to 1979/1980 and my first year of college. Luke & Laura blew up all over General Hospital and everyone on campus was watching. Of course I was watching AMC as well. The drinking age in NJ back then was 18, so we all gathered in the Rathskeller in the main building to eat lunch, drink and watch soaps. And play video games (did someone say Frogger?). This pretty much accounts for why I wound up with an abysmal GPA that year and left school for a while.

Well-Known Member

It was OK, but I can see now that they are going to eliminate the multiple trips back and forth and I think the story will suffer. I can understand making the hunting accident part of Al's story. I have no idea why they made a teenage Turcotte but they are completely changing the story line there.

The fact is that in any of these things there are changes that are STUPID and completely unnecessary. There was NO damn reason to reset the Dunning murder in Kentucky, NONE NONE NONE, except that maybe one of the writers was from Holden, Kentucky and decided to do a shout out.

Remember Misery? It was a great movie. but still there was NO REASON WHATSOEVER for Annie to use a sledgehammer instead of an axe like in the book.

Even if they are minor, when there is no reason for them at all, the changes just piss me off.

Well-Known Member

A very solid episode. The atmosphere of the town was nice and spooky, and I'm okay with it not being Derry. I can wait for the It remake for that. It was nice to see Annette O'Toole; would have been neat if Harry Anderson had played her husband, so they could say they reunited Bev and Richie after all. I liked how they expanded Josh Duhamel's role; the slaughterhouse sequence felt very natural to the story, and helped to deepen Dunning's character, whom I felt was slightly underwritten in the book. Franco is better, but he needs to stop with the smug grin; it makes him come off as insincere. I'm excited to see where things go from here though.